Mertins v. Pritchard
This text of 70 S.E. 328 (Mertins v. Pritchard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. There having been a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, a motion for a new trial by the defendant, and a judgment overruling the same, to which final judgment no exception was taken, the only exception being to the overruling of a demurrer to the plaintiff’s petition, and the bill of exceptions not having been certified or tendered for certification within the time prescribed by law after the decision complained of, no question is presented which this court has jurisdiction to consider, and the writ of error must be dismissed. Fuller v. Stump, 99 Ga. 316 (25 S. E. 649); Morris v. Dougherty, 132 Ga. 346 (63 S. E. 1114).
2. Exceptions pendente íite, although filed in due time in the trial court, can not be considered by this court when there is no exception to the final judgment rendered in the case. Harrell v. Tift, 70 Ga. 730; Kibben v. Coastwise Dredging Co., 120 Ga. 899 (48 S. E. 330) ; Simmons v. Scarborough, 129 Ga. 125 (58 S. E. 1037). See, as to both points, Lyndon v. Georgia Ry. etc. Co., 129 Ga. 353 (58 S. E. 1047).
Writ of error dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
70 S.E. 328, 135 Ga. 643, 1911 Ga. LEXIS 29, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mertins-v-pritchard-ga-1911.